avatarArgumentative Penguin

Summary

The article satirically critiques the current state of social justice, suggesting that the overzealous application of labels like 'racist' and 'patriarchal' has led to a loss of meaning and constructive dialogue, ultimately undermining genuine progress in combating oppression.

Abstract

The author of the article ironically congratulates humanity for achieving a state where everything is deemed racist and patriarchal, implying that this blanket labeling is counterproductive. The piece highlights the absurdity of equating systemic racial oppression with casting choices in entertainment and the dangers of replacing legal justice with public opinion trials on social media. It suggests that the overuse of accusatory language has diluted its impact, fostering intolerance and hindering real progress in addressing inequality. The article argues that the current approach to social justice, which includes dismissing due process and promoting echo chambers, is misguided and likely to lead to further division and regression in societal discourse.

Opinions

  • The author believes that the current social climate has trivialized the gravity of racial oppression and police brutality by equating it with less significant issues like casting decisions.
  • There is a critique of the modern justice system, which the author suggests has been supplanted by a form of social media-driven vigilantism that bypasses due process.
  • The piece expresses the view that the #believeAllVictims movement and the broad application of guilt by social media have been detrimental to women and have led to a backlash against the fight for gender equality.
  • It posits that the emphasis on emotional reactions over intellectual arguments and context has only deepened societal tensions and led to chaotic and regressive discourse.
  • The author argues that the loudest voices in social justice movements are not necessarily the most reflective or nuanced, and that the suppression of differing viewpoints is counterproductive to the cause.
  • The article suggests that the current method of combating sexism and racism, which involves prohibiting certain individuals from contributing to discussions based on their immutable characteristics, is misguided and ineffective.
  • It implies that the self-righteousness of being on the "good side of history" has led to a dismissal of pragmatic concerns and a refusal to engage with opposing viewpoints, which is detrimental to achieving true progress and consensus.
  • The author criticizes the creation of ideological echo chambers and the rejection of any dialogue that challenges one's worldview, indicating that this behavior is akin to trying to extinguish a fire with a flamethrower.
  • Finally, the piece mockingly celebrates the completion of a comprehensive list cataloging all forms of oppression, while also acknowledging the exhaustion and loss of friendships experienced along the way, hinting at the isolating effect of extreme ideological stances.

We Did It! Everything Is Racist And Patriarchal Now

Congratulations humanity, we finally achieved the impossible.

CREDIT: Mohamed_Hassan on Pixabay

We did it. All of us! We’ve not only jumped the shark, we’ve also avoided the orca and done a backflip over the blue whale. We’re an unmitigated success.

Thanks to your hard work we managed to equate two hundred years of racial oppression and police brutality with the casting of Bridgerton. With everyone pulling together in different directions we’ve managed to complete a comprehensive list of all things racist.

Turns out, it’s everything. Everything is racist.

And what about men huh? We got them good. Those patriarchal overlords had it coming. Misandry? No! Feminism! There are two types of men, the ones we’ve caught and the ones who still have something to hide. Don’t worry, they will be reckoned with in the fullness of time.

Not much point in changing laws, when we can assert guilt on Instagram and work from there. No doubt the evidence will show up if we wait for it. We’ve simplified the concept of justice and reclaimed it for the modern age.

Not legal justice of course, which developed from the patriarchy. A new all-empowering justice by accusation in the court of public opinion. Salemism. Nothing can go wrong with this. It’s foolproof — McCarthy did it with Communists and he’s a revered figure in American history.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m proud of us. This is the most comprehensive account of oppression in human history. We’ve done it! They said it couldn’t be done… but here we are. ‘The Goodies’. History will look back at 2017–2021 and thank us for fighting at the front lines of social justice

I’m sorry…What’s that?

It logically follows in a world where everything is racist, nothing is? That can’t be true. You‘re saying…. thousands of people pulling in different subjective directions killed off the meaningful discussion about race? That genuine progress was stymied by overhyped rhetoric?

That somehow, the overuse of a word like ‘racist’ rendered it meaningless and subsequently useless.

You mean to say that the assertion of guilt on social media was a bad idea. That #believeAllVictims made things worse for women? Why? Because of the predictable and inevitable backlash by both men and women to grey area cases? I’m supposed to believe it was wrong to label people as rape apologists when they urged caution with Aziz Ansari, Joe Biden and Johnny Depp?

You’re suggesting fighting for equality between the sexes is difficult and complicated. It involves amending the legal system to make it fairer and less traumatic for everyone involved. You reckon throwing out due process is a dangerous road for a society to travel because of what? All the historical precedent and other places in the world where it doesn’t happen?

You seem to think that removing context, intellectual argument and objectivity to discussions was a bad move? That what followed was a confusing emotion-based bun-fight that only deepened tensions across an exhausted general public?

That without sensible discussion entered to in good faith without fear of retribution, what emerges is angry chaos and regressive discourse?

You’re saying that promoting the loudest and most vociferous voices above nuanced and reflective ones was an error made by Medium and other social media platforms? Just because something is popular doesn’t mean that it’s morally justifiable.

The huge levels of intolerance with which we policed the discussions on tolerance was an own goal when viewed in the fullness of time. You think it made things worse for the majority of POC and women outside of ideological niche environments like Medium, The Arts and University Campuses.

You’re putting on record that what feels like progress isn’t so? And instead, is the continual deepening of ideological echo chambers from which there is no real philosophical escape or competent endgame?

You think we should unsubscribe from virtue signalling support for people who already share our worldview? And do what instead? Seek discussion with people who don’t agree whilst maintaining an open mind to their world view? Because we might what? Learn something? Work toward progress and consensus?

You think our approach to combatting the psychological predisposition towards ‘othering’ that feeds sexism and racism is wrong? You think prohibiting people from adding insights to these discussions based on immutable characteristics is what? Misguided? Sorry….what you said was ‘it’s like trying to put out a house-fire with a flamethrower’.

Well… Fuck you.

Feeling I belong on the ‘good side of history’ outweighs any of your real-world pragmatic concerns about where this is heading. No of course I haven’t done any reading about the subjective nature of the word ‘good’. Good, like truth, can be anything I want to be.

I know that to be true. I think it. Cogito Ergo Veritas.

It’s obvious to me, that you’re both a closet racist and a potential rapist trying to trigger and oppress me. I don’t have the time and energy to educate you. If you don’t know what you’ve done wrong, you’re part of the problem. This discussion is over.

It doesn’t matter what you say anyway. You’re on the list. You’re the worst kind of evil.

I’m just relieved there were only two of us left to finish this comprehensive list. Two of us who made it to this end-point of cataloguing. The final solution. Should we call it that? I don’t see any reason why we can’t. Nobody who shares my world view thinks it’s wrong and even if they did, they couldn’t tell me — to do so would be tone policing.

And THAT would be oppressing me.

I’m glad we got here. Just two the two of us. It’s been a long hard slog and we lost lots of friends along the way. I’m pleased that we managed to build this utopia together. A world free at last from oppression, with all this hatred carefully catalogued.

Though to be honest, I’m not comfortable with the way you’re looking at me. Could that be a new form of oppression?

Hated that? You’ll probably want to fight me at the end of these

Sexism
Racism
Social Justice
Opinion
Life
Recommended from ReadMedium